1 For wealth of dependency theory literature making such arguments, see Santos, Theotonio Dos, ‘Über die Struktur der Abhängigkeit’ in: Senghaas, Dieter ed., Imperialismus und strukturelle Gewalt: Analysen über abhängige Reproduktion (Frankfurt 1972) 243Google Scholar. Also compare O'Brien, Philip J., ‘Zur Kritik lateinamerikanischer Dependencia-Theorien’ in: Puhle, Hans-Jürgen ed., Lateinamerika: Historische Realität und Dependencia-Theorien (Hamburg 1977) 39Google Scholar; O'Brien, Philip J., ‘Dependency Revisited’ in: Abel, Christopher and Lewis, Colin M. eds, Latin America: Economic Imperialism and the State (London 1985) 40–69.Google Scholar

2 O'Brien, Philip, ‘A Critique of Latin American Theories of Dependency’ in: Oxaal, Ivar, Barnett, Tony and Booth, David eds, Beyond the Sociology of Development: Economy and Society in Latin America and Africa (London 1975) 16Google Scholar; Cockcroft, James D., Frank, André Gunder and Johnson, Dale L., Dependence and Underdevelopment: Latin America's Political Economy (New York 1972) 34.Google Scholar

3 According to Sautter, Hermann, Unterentwicklung und Abhängigkeit als Ergebnisse außenwirt-schaftlicher Verflechtung: Zum ökonomischen Aussagewert der ‘dependencia’-Theorie (Göttingen 1975) 1Google Scholar. The volume published by Louis, William Roger, The Robinson and Gallagher Controversy (New York 1976)Google Scholar, contains not only the important writings of Robinson and Gallagher but also a large number of critical reactions to the theory of free-trade imperialism (up to the mid-1970s). The Gallagher and Robinson essay ‘Der Imperialismus des Freihandels’ in: Wehler, Hans-Ulrich ed., Imperialismus (Cologne 1970) 183–200Google Scholar. In the sense of the free-trade imperialism theory, argues, Richard Graham, ‘Robinson and Gallagher in Latin America: The Meaning of Informal Imperialism’ in: Louis, William Roger ed., The Robinson and Gallagher Controversy, 217–221.Google Scholar

4 The official British position is laid out in detail in Castlereagh's memorandum to the British envoy in Madrid, Henry Wellesley of 1 April 1812, Public Record Office/Foreign Office (= PRO FO) 72/127; In print: Webster, Charles Kinsley ed., Britain and the Independence, of Latin America, 1812–1830: Selected Documents from the Foreign Office Archives II (London 1938) 309–316Google Scholar. For discussion on the State Paper see The Cambridge History of British Foreign Policy, 1783–1919 II (Cambridge 1923) 622Google Scholar; Webster, Charles Kinsley, The Foreign Policy of Castlereagh, 1815–1822: Britain and the European Alliance (London 1947)Google Scholar. Temperley, Harold W.V., Life of Canning (London 1905, Reprint Westport 1970) 140 ff.Google Scholar

5 Petition to the Lords of His Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council from the humble memorial of the undersigned merchants, shipowners, manufacturers, and traders of London, The New Times, 29 April 1822. See also Hammond, William Jackson, The History of British Commercial Activity in Mexico, 1820–1830 (Thesis at University of California 1929) 223Google Scholar; and Packson, Frederic L., The Independence of the South-American Republics: A Study in Recognition and Foreign Policy (Philadelphia 1903) 198–200.Google Scholar

6 Webster, Charles Kinsley, The Foreign Policy of Castlereagh, 1815–1822: Britain and the European Alliance (London 1947) 428–436.Google Scholar

7 Hervey to Canning, México 18January 1824, PRO FO 50/4; see also the paraphrase of Cody, William F., British Interest in the Independence of Mexico, 1808–1827 (London 1954) 152 ffGoogle Scholar. For the reaction of the government, see Canning to Hervey, London 23 April 1824, PRO FO 50/3. See also Hervey to Canning (private and confidential), México 21 February 1824, PRO FO 50/4.

8 See e.g., the following reports: Ward to Canning, México 22 September 1825; Ward to Canning, México 27 September 1825; Ward to Canning (private and highly confidential), Mexico 30 September 1825; all in PRO FO 50/14. Ward to Canning (secret and confidential), México 29 May 1826; PRO FO 50/21. See also correspondence concerning the new agreement in PRO FO 97/271.

9 Text (English and Spanish): Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation, between His Majesty and the United States of Mexico, together with two Additional Articles thereunto annexed (London 1828) [one copy in Staatarchiv Bremen 2-C.13.a.]; also printed in British and Foreign State Papers 14, 1826–1827, 614–629 and in Nouveau Recueil de Traités VII (1829) 80–99.Google Scholar

10 A detailed report on the British and American negotiations to reach an agreement with Mexico was provided by the Hanseatic commercial agent H. Nolte to Mayor Smidt of Bremen on 31 December 1826, Staatsarchiv Bremen 2-C.13.a.

11 To be sure, Ward had a relatively easy game in Mexico in as much as the Mexicans at the time already deeply mistrusted the Yanquis. Just a few days after his arrival in Washington (three years earlier!) the first Mexican envoy to the USA, Zozaya, sent the then imperial Mexican government a deeply negative report about the relationship of the two neighbouring countries: ‘La soberbia de estos republicanos no les permite vernos como iguales sino como inferiores; su envanecimiento se extiende en mi juicio a creer que su Capital lo será de todas las Américas; aman entrañablemente a nuestro dinero, no a nosotros, ni son capaces de entrar en convenio de alianza o comercio sino por su propia conveniencia, desconociendo la recíproca. Con el tiempo han de ser nuestros enemigos jurados, y con tal previsión los debemos tratar desde hoy, que se nos venden amigos.’ Zozaya to the Mexican Foreign Ministry, 26 December 1822 in: Antonio de la Peña y Reyes, La Diplomacia Mexicana: Pequeña Revista Histórica I (México 1923) 103. He added that there was talk everywhere of organizing the Army, which could only trace back to US intentions in regard to the province of Texas.

12 Ward characterized the position of the USA as follows: ‘It is the great object of the United States to convince the natives of Spanish America that there exists between them and their brethren of the North a community of interests in which no European Power can share’, Ward to Canning (No. 32), México 22 September 1825, PRO FO 50/14. A few days later he insisted: ‘The formation of a general American Federation from which all European Powers, but more particularly Great Britain, shall be excluded, is the great object of Mr Poinsett's exertions’, Ward to Canning (private and confidential), México 30 September 1825, PRO FO 50/14.

13 Ward to Canning (No. 42), México 27 September 1825, PRO FO 50/14. Ward even made it clear to President Victoria that Great Britain would accept the exception rule for Latin American countries if the USA were also required to adopt this stipulation in its treaty, Ward to Canning (No. 68), México 15 December 1825, PRO FO 50/14.

14 Whitaker, Arthur Preston, The Western Hemisphere Idea: Its Rise and Decline (Ithaca, London 1954) 1 and 5Google Scholar; with respect to the decisive importance of the Enlightenment in formulating the related common ground between Anglosaxon and Spanish America, see Whitaker, A.P., Latin America and the Enlightenment (New York 1942)Google Scholar as well as Bernstein, Harry, Origins of Inter-American Interest, 1700–1812 (Philadelphia 1945).Google Scholar

15 Poinsett to Clay, México 31 May 1826, National Archives, Washington, Record Group (= NAW RG) 59, Diplomatic Dispatches (= DD) Mexico, Vol. 1. ‘They have not a single vessel capable of making a foreign voyage. The whole commercial marine of Mexico consists of a few bongos, miserable schooners.’ See also Poinsett to Clay, No. 50, México 12 July 1826, NAW RG 59, DD Mexico, Vol. 2.

16 Important stages of the treaty negotiations of 1826–1829 can be reconstructed from the diplomatic correspondence of PRO FO 50 and of NAW RG 59, DD Mexico, Vols. 3 and 4. Several important source texts for the negotiating phase and for the ratification process are available in print (partially very faulty, partially greatly abbreviated or summarized) in the book of Carlos Bosch García ed., Documentos de la relación de México con los Estados Unidos I: El mester político de Poinsett (México 1983); Summaries in Bosch García: Material para la historia diplomática de México (México y los Estados Unidos, 1820–1848) (México 1957). See the brief overview of background, negotiation, and final failure to ratify the treaty by García, Bosch, Problemas diplomáticos del México independiente (México 1949) 13–38Google Scholar; García, Bosch, Historia de las relaciones entre México y los Estados Unidos 1819–1848 (México 1961) 211–278.Google Scholar

17 Brading, David A., Los orígenes del nacionalismo mexicano (México 1973) 154 f.Google Scholar

18 The British complaints over this unfair US competition can be found in almost every consular and diplomatic report. See, for example, A.G. Wavell to Taylor, 2 September 1826, PRO FO 50/30 (‘systematic smuggling carried on principally by N. Americans at Tampico’); Ward to Canning, 19 January 1827, PRO FO 50/31 A. (‘The quantity of goods smuggled in is infinitely greater than that upon which the duties are paid’); Ward to Canning, 5 February 1827, PRO FO 50/31 A.

19 Taylor to Clay, Veracruz 2 July 1826, NAW RG 59 Consular Dispatches (= CD) Veracruz, Roll 1.

20 Charles O'Gorman to Crawford, México 1 April 1828, PRO FO 50/46, 262–264.

21 Vázquez, Josefina Zoraida, ‘Los primeros tropiezos’ in: Villegas, Daniel Cosío ed., Hislorin general de Mexico III (México 1976) 50.Google Scholar

22 Regarding smuggling, see Bernecker, Walther L., Contrabando: Ilegalidad y corrupción en el México del siglo XIX (México 1994).Google Scholar

23 See Schneider, Jürgen, Frankreich und die Unabhängigkeit Spanisch-Amerikas: Zum französischen Handel mit den entstehenden Nationalstaaten (1810–1850) I: Darstellung (Stuttgart 1981) 84.Google Scholar

24 Uhde, Adolph, Die Länder am untern Rio bravo del Norte: Geschichtliches und Erlebtes (Heidelberg 1861) 24 f.Google Scholar

25 See Canales, Inés Herrera, El comercio exterior de México, 1821–1875 (México 1977) 26Google Scholar; in regard to the following, see also Herrera Canales, El comercio exterior, 25–58 and Romero, Matías, Mexico and the United States: A Study of Subjects Affecting their Political, Commercial, and Social Relations, Made with a Vieto of their Promotion I (New York 1898) 155Google Scholar. Romero's import data lie much higher, especially in the wine/foodstuffs column (1826–1828 at around 1 million pesos each year) but do not deviate substantially from Herrera's otherwise.

26 Regarding changes in the trade structure during the first years of independence, see Ward, H.G., Mexico in 1827 I (London 1828) 431–438Google Scholar; according to Ward's data, import trade recorded at an annual average of $10,364,238 before independence, dropped to $7,245,052 in 1821 and even to $3,723,019 in 1822. In 1823 it rose slowly again to $3,913,013 and then increased rapidly.

27 O'Gorman to Bidwell, México 4 May 1833, PRO FO 50/80 B, 71–75. Pakenham later expressed more scepticism over the new law in which he too admittedly saw no disadvantage for British shipping. Pakenham to Palmerston, México 11 November 1833, PRO FO 50/80 A, 128–133.

28 Canales, Inés Herrera, Estadística del comertio exterior de México, 1821–1875 (México 1982) 95–109.Google Scholar

29 Humphreys, Robert A., ‘Rivalidades angloamericanas y emancipatión hispanoamericana’ in: Martinez, Bernardo García et al. eds, Historia y Sotiedad en el mundo de habla española (México 1970) 294 fGoogle Scholar. The advantages of US shippers over the British is discussed in detail in Mackenzie to Canning, Xalapa 24 July 1824, Board of Trade (= BT) 6/53 (without pagination).

30 ‘Le commerce du Mexique’, Le Moniteur of 3 June 1862, Archives Nationales Paris (ANP) F¹² 2695.

31 O'Gorman, ‘Information Regarding the Trade of Tampico, Obtained Through a Private Channel in September 1824’, México 1 March 1825, PRO FO 203/3, 122.

32 Taylor to Adams, Alvarado 5 January 1825, NAW RG 59 CD Veracruz, Roll 1.

33 O'Gorman to Planta, México 1 March 1825, PRO FO 203/4.

34 Cody, British Interest, 270 (note 7).

35 Joaquín de Miranda y de Madariaga, ‘Proyecto de Reconquista de Nueva España’, Madrid 20 April 1829 according to Jaime Delgado, España y México en el siglo XIX III (Madrid 1953) 271–285. Official Value of Exports from Great Britain to Mexico, Staatsarchiv Bremen 2-C.13.b.l. The Miranda data corresponds roughly to the official British figures. According to them the declared value of manufactured cotton goods which Great Britain exported to Mexico between 1822 and 1825 amounted to £1,157,602. See ‘Return relating to Trade with Mexico from 1820 to 1841’, Parliamentary Papers (PP) 1842 XXXIX, 531. de Tejada, Miguel Lerdo, Comercio esterior de México desde la conquista hasta hoy (México 1853) Tab. 37–41Google Scholar. The data for Great Britain originated from the previous table since Lerdo de Tejada compiled no data for the British-Mexican trade of these years.

36 O'Gorman to Planta, México 26 December 1825, PRO FO 203/4.

37 O'Gorman, Statement, PRO FO 50/110.

38 Mackenzie to Canning, Xalapa 24 July 1824, PRO FO 50/7 and BT 6/53.

39 Rapport sur le Mexique, ‘Premier rapport sur l'état du Mexique’ (1827), ANP F¹² 2695.

40 Crawford to O'Gorman, Tampico 5 January 1837, PRO FO 50/110, 138 f. Even after midcentury a large portion of British manufactured goods were shipped to Mexico by detour via New Orleans (Major port: Matamoros). Charles Uhde (British vice consul in Matamoros) to Cumberlege, 11 January 1851, PRO FO 50/247.

41 Lerdo de Tejada, Comnercio esterior, Tab. 37–41 (note 35); see also Herrera Canales, Estadística del comercio exterior, 81 (note 28).

42 Potash, Robert A., ‘El “Comercio Esterior de México” de Miguel Lerdo de Tejada: un error estadístìco’, El Trìmestre Económico 20 (1953) 474–479.Google Scholar

43 Gregg, Josiah, Commerce of the Prairies, or the Journal of a Santa Fe Trader during Eight Expeditions across the Great Western Prairies and a Residence of Nearly Nine Years in Northern Mexico (New York 1844) 332Google Scholar; Moorhead, Max L., Nero Mexico's Royal Road: Trade and Travel on the Chihuahua Trail (Norman 1958) 55–75Google Scholar; Pattie, James O., Pattie's Personal Narrative, 1824–1830 (Early Western Travels XVIII, 1748–1846; Cleveland 1905) 255–300Google Scholar; Webb, James Josiah, Adventures in the Santa Fé Trade, 1844–1847 (Glendale 1931)Google Scholar. See also the reprint with commentary of parts of Gregg's ‘Commerce of the Prairies’, The Merchant's Magazine II (1844) 501–517 as well as numerous general essays (especially those appearing between 1910 and 1920) commenting on this theme in ‘Missouri Historical Review’.

44 Moorhead, Nero Mexico's Royal Road, 76 f (note 43); Magoffin, Susan Shelby, Down the Santa Fé Trail and into Mexico: The Diary of Susan Shelby Magoffin, 1846–1847 (New Haven 1926) passim.Google Scholar

45 As an overview to the first ten years of the Santa Fe trade, see F.F. Stephens ed., ‘Major Alphonso Wetmore's Diary of a Journey to Santa Fé, 1828’, Missouri Historical Review 8/4 (July 1914) 177–197.Google Scholar

46 Gabriac to Ministère des Affaires Etrangères (Paris), México 30 January 1857 in: Díaz, Lilia ed., Versión francesa de. México: Informes diplomáticos I (México 1963) 385 f.Google Scholar

47 Text of both treaties in: Manning, William R. ed., Diplomatic Correspondence of the United Stales Concerning the Independence of the Latin American Nations (New York 1925) 1137–1141Google Scholar. For interpretation see among other Rippy, J. Fred, Rivalry of the United States and Great Britain over Latin America, 1808–1830 (Baltimore 1929) 212–227Google Scholar; Callahan, James Morton, American Foreign Policy in Mexican Relations (New York 1967) 244–277Google Scholar; see also Wilson, Howard L., ‘President Buchanan's Proposed Intervention in Mexico’, American Historical Review V (1899–1900) 687–701Google Scholar; see the indignant reaction of the French chargé d'affaires to the McLane-Ocampo treaty due to the damaging effect on European interests: Gabriac to Ministère des Affaires Etrangères (Paris), México 11 January 1860, in: Díaz, Versión francesa II, 125–127 (note 46).

48 Richthofen to Prussian Foreign Ministry (Trade Report for 1851), Mexico 25 August 1852, Zentrales Staatsarchiv, Merseburg Department (ZSAM) 2.4.1.II 5229, pp. 173–219 (today: Bundesarchiv Potsdam).

49 Source: U.S. Department of State, Report I, p. 592. In specific years there were minor deviations from the total data in Table I.

50 Hanseatic traders of Mexico City and Veracruz to the Senate of the Hanseatic Cities, México/Veracruz 1 and 20 November 1844, Staatsarchiv Bremen 2-C 13.c.1.b.

51 Mertens to Bremen Senate, Veracruz 15 August 1860, Staatsarchiv Bremen 2-C.13.c.1.c. According to the trend, this comment is also confirmed by British sources.

52 Platt pinpointed the beginning of the British withdrawal from Latin America in the 1820s - thus in an era when British exports to the new republic experienced their first boom; Platt, D.C.M., ‘Dependency in Nineteenth-Century Latin America: An Historian Objects’, Latin American Research Review 15/1 (1980) 113–130.Google Scholar

53 Katz, Friedrich, Deutschland, Diaz und die mexikanische Revolution: Die deutsche Polilik in Mexiko 1870–1920 (East-Berlin 1964) 96Google Scholar. Katz also refers to the interruption of the supply of cotton products to Mexico as a result of the temporary lack of American cotton during the American Civil War. The economic difficulties traced back to political problems and supported the decision to withdraw.

54 Meister, Carl Ludwig Daniel, Der Freihandel Hamburgs, ein Bedürfniss für Deutschland: Votum eines Hamburger Kaufmanns in bezug auf den Handel mil Westindien und Méjico (Printed as manuscript; Hamburg 1848) 16–18.Google Scholar

55 Katz, Deutschland, Díaz, 97–99 (note 53). See Herm. Jeth, ‘México: Die Einfuhr von Texlilwaaren’, Export 15 (1889) 218 f.; Export 16 (1889) 233–235; Export 17 (1889) 248 f.

56 Katz, Deutschland, Díaz, 7 (note 53). See also Katz, ‘Verschwörung und Revolution: Die mexikanische Revolution aus der Sicht des kaiserlichen Deutschland’ in: Klingenstein, Crete et al. eds, Europäisierung der Erde? Studien zur Einwirkung Europas auf die aussereuropäische Welt (Wien 1980) 214–236.Google Scholar

57 Details of the last section are supported by Walther L. Bernecker and Raymond Th. Buve, ‘Mexiko 1821–1900’ in: Buve, Raymond Th. and Fisher, John R. eds, Lateinamerika von 1760 bis 1900 (Stuttgart 1992) 498–556Google Scholar, especially 539–556 (= Handbuch der Geschichte Lateinamerikas, Vol. 2). See also Rosenzweig, Fernando, ‘Las exportaciones de México de 1877–1911’, El Trimestre Económico 108 (1960) 537–560Google Scholar, and d'Olwer, Luis Nicolau, ‘Las Inversiones Extranjeras’ in: Villegas, Daniel Cosío ed., Historia de México: El Porfiriato, la vida económica (México 1965) 973–1178Google Scholar. As statistical basis, see Seminario de Historia Moderna de México, Estadísticas económicas del Porfiriato: Comercio exterior (México 1960).

58 Regarding this, see Crapol, Edward P., ‘From Anglophobia to Fragile Rapprochement: Anglo-American Relations in the Early Twentieth Century’ in: Hans-Jürgen Schröder, Confrontation and Cooperation: Germany and the United States in the Era of World War I, 1900–1924 (Providence 1993) 13–31.Google Scholar

59 For the total context, see von Hase, Ragnhild Fiebig, Lateinamerika als Konfliktherd der deutsch-amerikanischen Beziehungen 1890–1903: Vom Beginn der Panamerikapolitik bis zur Venezuelakrise von 1902/1903 (Göttingen 1986)Google Scholar; see also Schröder, Hans-Jürgen, Deutschland und Amerika in der Epoche des Ersten Weltkrieges 1900–1924 (Stuttgart 1993) especially 11–21.Google Scholar